You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Enhanced Biological Straw Saccharification Through Coculturing of Lignocellulose-Degrading Microorganisms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12010-015-1539-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mohamed Taha, Esmaeil Shahsavari, Khalid Al-Hothaly, Aidyn Mouradov, Andrew T. Smith, Andrew S. Ball, Eric M. Adetutu |
| Abstract |
Lignocellulosic waste (LCW) is an abundant, low-cost, and inedible substrate for the induction of lignocellulolytic enzymes for cellulosic bioethanol production using an efficient, environmentally friendly, and economical biological approach. In this study, 30 different lignocellulose-degrading bacterial and 18 fungal isolates were quantitatively screened individually for the saccharification of four different ball-milled straw substrates: wheat, rice, sugarcane, and pea straw. Rice and sugarcane straws which had similar Fourier transform-infrared spectroscopy profiles were more degradable, and resulted in more hydrolytic enzyme production than wheat and pea straws. Crude enzyme produced on native straws performed better than those on artificial substrates (such as cellulose and xylan). Four fungal and five bacterial isolates were selected (based on their high strawase activities) for constructing dual and triple microbial combinations to investigate microbial synergistic effects on saccharification. Combinations such as FUNG16-FUNG17 (Neosartorya fischeri-Myceliophthora thermophila) and RMIT10-RMIT11 (Aeromonas hydrophila-Pseudomonas poae) enhanced saccharification (3- and 6.6-folds, respectively) compared with their monocultures indicating the beneficial effects of synergism between those isolates. Dual isolate combinations were more efficient at straw saccharification than triple combinations in both bacterial and fungal assays. Overall, co-culturing can result in significant increases in saccharification which may offer significant commercial potential for the use of microbial consortia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 144 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 21% |
| Researcher | 19 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 13% |
| Unknown | 35 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 36 | 25% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 21 | 14% |
| Engineering | 9 | 6% |
| Chemical Engineering | 8 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 15% |
| Unknown | 42 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 December 2015.
All research outputs
#14,218,430
of 22,793,427 outputs
Outputs from Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology
#1,486
of 2,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,118
of 255,870 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology
#18
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,793,427 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,503 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 255,870 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.